Discussion 2/05: Cloud Atlas by David Mitchell
Before I officially start discussion, I want to see who's actually reading this book. From conversations with you guys here and there, it seems like I'm going to be talking to myself on this one...
Um, I thought I just wrote in here, but something seems out-of-whack...
Anyways, I got it last weekend but I've barely started it, as in page 6 starting it. I'll get more done this weekend, but there's no way I'll have it finished. I'll do what I can, though.
[QUOTE=moe.ron]Before I officially start discussion, I want to see who's actually reading this book. From conversations with you guys here and there, it seems like I'm going to be talking to myself on this one...[/QUOTE]
I read the book when it came out.
I was here. Then I wasn't. Then I was again.
[QUOTE=moe.ron]Before I officially start discussion, I want to see who's actually reading this book. From conversations with you guys here and there, it seems like I'm going to be talking to myself on this one...[/QUOTE]
I read it when it came out.
I was here. Then I wasn't. Then I was again.
Mirror talk, oh yeah|haey ho ,klat rorriM
mirror talk, or jive talkin'? (sorry 'bout that, kids...somethin' about the permission settings or somesuchshit)
ok, so far i've got parkaboy to talk to...who else?
Wait, only those who've finished this can discuss? I mean, I understand why because of spoilers, but if I can't discuss it then I'm just going to stop reading it and put my time to something else then.
of course you can discuss, professor!!
Groovy. Carry on!
I got the book for christmas but i haven't started it (it is, in fact, at home) so i will at some point probably read and post in the discussion hopefully, but that's all i got.
I'm just over half done with it. No doubt I will be discussing when I finish it.
well, let's officially begin discussing this book. Pete, did you get the big finish like you hoped/expected?
Hey, I'm reading it but I'm a new member! I don't mean to be such a bum. Liking it so far.
should we delay this discussion a bit? i know several ppl are still reading...
[QUOTE=moe.ron]well, let's officially begin discussing this book. Pete, did you get the big finish like you hoped/expected?[/QUOTE]
Actually, I did sort of predict the end. It was hinted at in RF's letters.
*sees I finally got back into book club*
I am a happy bee.
No, I say carry on. If you wait until I finish, you're gonna be waiting a LOOOOOOOONG time, promise.
Moe, you told me that there were questions that you put out to consider for discussion. Where are they? Am I blind? I can't find them.
i did for the frey book, and was going to for cloud atlas, but i didn't really get the feeling a lot of people were reading it.
anyway, mitchell's use of forshadowing was great in that you kinda knew what was eventually going to happen, but he left out enough to keep it a surprise. frobisher's suicide was a total surprise to me, however. what was your favorite section(s)? i especially enjoyed somni and frobisher and while shoosha's crossing wasn't exactly my favorite part, the language and writing kept it engaging.
let's talk about the language mitchell uses throughout and some of the intertwining themes.
I thought that the way he effectively used a different voice in each of the "books" was great. None of them seemed forced and faked, they all flowed. I hated the Shoosha story until he started being friends with the girl. Then I started to like it.
I thought the whole birth mark thing was a little farfetched, but added to the idea of reincarnation - which was brushed on a little in a couple of the stories.
Somni's story was one of the cooler ones, but it was slow moving until you get used to the interview and then it was cut off. I didn't really understand why they thought of her as God in Sloosha's Crossing. And I don't understand, at all, why Somni thought of Cavendish as God. I felt that some things in the book really needed to be expanded on more - even though it was already over 500 pages.
It seemed like he cut everyone of the stories right when I started to get into them. That's why it took me forever to get through the first half of the book and two days to get through the second half.
I never saw RF's death coming. I wish they would have done more with the Cloud Atlas composition that he did.
Adam Ewing's story became predictable. I figured everything out on that one with quite a few "entries" left.
I really enjoyed the Luisa Rey Mystery. Although it was really far fetched and was basically a bad mystery novel that couldn't stand on its own. It worked really well in the book though. I thought it fit in perfectly for what it was supposed to do to the story as a whole.
My favorite story was the Timothy Cavendish story. I don't really even know why. I just found every situation that he got himself into entirely amusing. It was like somebody was pushing him down the stairs, one step at a time. Everytime he got up something bad would happen. For some reason this story reminded me of Bubba-HoTep. Maybe it's the whole "Old People in a Retirement Home on a Mission" thing.
Over all - each of the stories weren't that great... but when you put them together, they make a really good book. I'm sure I will read this book again because now that I know what's going on I want to find all the little clues and hints at everything.
All right, as I recall, Mitchell was using Power over Weakness as a thematic structure to tie together the narratives. It seemed to me to be a cobination of a Nietzchean view of history-Eternal return- and Thomas Pynchon's struggle between the Elect and the Preterite.
In Mitchell's book the elect, the priveledged, the white man, the faceless totalitarian state work above the preterite, which in this case seems most often to be the individual as a microcosm for an etire repressed class. the clone, the blackman on the ship, etc.
What Mitchell, suggests, in my view, is that the only way the individual liberates himself from the power structure of the powerful is through the cyclic view of history presented.
As PG said about the stories not being much on their own (which has validity), so too are the individuals we follow less than the totality of the Individual Archetype represented by the repeating birthmark.
A birthmark in the truest sense as it marks each individual as something set apart from the totality run by the elect and connects each indiviudal to a broader spectrum of history. A history in fact which is no longer linear but is instead recursive, folding in on itself cocnh-like as the stories themselves fold in like some Russian Doll. Parts within parts.
However, it seems to me that this position is fairly untennable for the individual as Mitchell illustrates them being sacrificed in their struggle against the elect, ultimately not able to enjoy the connection to the cyclic thread of history.
Further, the meatphysical nature of this connection seems to do little at the existential level where the individual resides. We have a a series of lives interrupted, cut short or enlisted in the service of larger apparatuses that subsume said individual. What victories are present seem of lesser weight than the force of Domination that pervades the novel.
I was here. Then I wasn't. Then I was again.
[QUOTE=Parkaboy]A birthmark in the truest sense as it marks each individual as something set apart from the totality run by the elect and connects each indiviudal to a broader spectrum of history. A history in fact which is no longer linear but is instead recursive, folding in on itself cocnh-like as the stories themselves fold in like some Russian Doll. Parts within parts.[/QUOTE]
Do you think that this is why the book had to be written the way it was? The way the stories were each interrupted abruptly in the middle, right when they started to get going good.
*Awesome post, by the way.
[QUOTE=PGoutis01]Do you think that this is why the book had to be written the way it was? The way the stories were each interrupted abruptly in the middle, right when they started to get going good.
*Awesome post, by the way.[/QUOTE]
Thanks.
Hmm... I think it is certainly a possibility. another is the use of "tonics" which Douglas Hoffstadtter talks about in [I]Godel, Escher, Bach[/I]. Therein he discusses the recurive tendency of certain patterns, narrative among them but also music. In this tonic idea a music piece is begun, the tonic is an expected movement from what I gather that is set up only to be abandoned for much of the piece and then picked up later, if at all. Frobisher might have some suggestion in his own Cloud Atals of this kind of structure, but I do not specifically rememember. in any case it certainly underscores the Nietzschean idea of Eternal Reccurrence.
"This life as you now live it and have lived it, you will have to live once more and innumerable times more; and there will be nothing new in it, but every pain and every joy and every thought and sigh and everything immeasurably small or great in your life must return to you-all in the same succession and sequence-even this spider and this moonlight between the trees, and even this moment and I myself. The eternal hourglass of existence is turned over and over, and you with it, a grain of dust. "
-Nietzsche
In such a fashion Mitchell is able to suggest etrnal reccurrence metatextually as the reader himslef experiences it as he gooes through the book. We are introduced to a situation that reccurs both in the next cahpter, but also reccurs as first presented to us along the opposite side of the narrative. The book to me reads like some sort of Rorschachian blot where you fold the piece in half to produce the image. What Mitchell has done is to lay several such blots on top of one another and folded them into a book. You see half the blot, but do not see it's twin until you scan the other blots in the series. In this way each interregnum allows for reflection and anticipation of the next iteration in the cycle as well as the unfolding of the thread you had read previously.
It's a fairly clever device and one of the book's strongpoints to be sure.
I was here. Then I wasn't. Then I was again.
[QUOTE=Parkaboy]It's a fairly clever device and one of the book's strongpoints to be sure.[/QUOTE]
Yes, it's definately the books strong point.
I loved how each book gave clues and hints of the other books. How somehow they seemed to all be slightly related - not just by the birthmarks.
Like when Mrs. Rey knows the composition Cloud Atlas before she even knows it's Cloud Atlas. Or how Cavendish is a God to Somni and Somni is a God in Sloosha's Crossing. RF is trying to find the rest of Ewings journal and Cavendish is trying to find the rest of the mystery. The interview with Somni, I believe, is the Egg/Holygraphics in Sloosha's Crossing. I thought that all of these things really brought the story together and made it something "good" instead of - like I stated earlier - a bunch of OK stories.
Parka, you quote Nietzsche a few times - What of his reading do you recommend? I want a generalization of everything... Have you read the Viking Portable Nietzshe?
I have Existentialism from Doestevki to Satre and I really didn't get passed Kaufman's intro Chapter on everybody. I know I probably just butchered everybody's name just now, but I don't feel like finding my copy. Is the rest of that book worth going through (if you know the book I am talking about)?
David Mitchell made a heinous mistake. It doesn't say 'Welcome to Hull' on the sign at the Train Station. It says 'Welcome to Kingston-upon-Hull'
Whenever I see the sign I think, who the hell are [I]you[/I] to [I]welcome[/I] [B]ME[/B]?
Isn't that terrible? I'll carry on with the reading now.
test..
Just finished it tonight. Some amazing posts.
I really liked the Cavendish stuff too, for no real reason.
After I glanced at the Sloosha parts I didn't know if I was going to make it. I have no idea what the technical term for it is, but when authors write out accents like that it usually makes me insane. Friends have recommended Irvine Welsh to me. Friends become corpses. I normally can't handle accent stuff and don't bother, but I thought this one wasn't so tough to get through and I felt like I was reading at a normal pace. The closest thing I can compare it to is Huck Finn, but this was even easier than that.
[QUOTE=tomstrong83]Just finished it tonight. Some amazing posts.
I really liked the Cavendish stuff too, for no real reason.
After I glanced at the Sloosha parts I didn't know if I was going to make it. I have no idea what the technical term for it is, but when authors write out accents like that it usually makes me insane. Friends have recommended Irvine Welsh to me. Friends become corpses. I normally can't handle accent stuff and don't bother, but I thought this one wasn't so tough to get through and I felt like I was reading at a normal pace. The closest thing I can compare it to is Huck Finn, but this was even easier than that.[/QUOTE]
It's quite a good book, but yeah, that accent shit can be annoying.
I was here. Then I wasn't. Then I was again.
[QUOTE=PGoutis01]Yes, it's definately the books strong point.
I loved how each book gave clues and hints of the other books. How somehow they seemed to all be slightly related - not just by the birthmarks.
Like when Mrs. Rey knows the composition Cloud Atlas before she even knows it's Cloud Atlas. Or how Cavendish is a God to Somni and Somni is a God in Sloosha's Crossing. RF is trying to find the rest of Ewings journal and Cavendish is trying to find the rest of the mystery. The interview with Somni, I believe, is the Egg/Holygraphics in Sloosha's Crossing. I thought that all of these things really brought the story together and made it something "good" instead of - like I stated earlier - a bunch of OK stories.
Parka, you quote Nietzsche a few times - What of his reading do you recommend? I want a generalization of everything... Have you read the Viking Portable Nietzshe?
I have Existentialism from Doestevki to Satre and I really didn't get passed Kaufman's intro Chapter on everybody. I know I probably just butchered everybody's name just now, but I don't feel like finding my copy. Is the rest of that book worth going through (if you know the book I am talking about)?[/QUOTE]The Existentialism I haven't read since college. Then I loaned it to a friend. Said friend gave my original Fight Club hardback away as a birthday present so I didn't get this one back either. As I recall it's a good precis on aall the philosophers contained therein.
I have read the Viking portable Nietzsche and took a class on Nietzsche where we read pretty much everything else. thus Spake Zarathustra is a good intro and an easy read, it's in the Kaufmann portable. I liked The Birth of Tragedy. Human, All Too Human and Beyond Good and Evil. I seem to recall liking some of The Will to Power but it's been awhile. Beyond Good and Evil and Human, All Too Human are made up of aphorisms. Most of his basic philosophy is outlined in Zarathustra I'd start there and then decide which to look into next if you like his ideas.
I was here. Then I wasn't. Then I was again.
[QUOTE=Vendetta]David Mitchell made a heinous mistake. It doesn't say 'Welcome to Hull' on the sign at the Train Station. It says 'Welcome to Kingston-upon-Hull'
Whenever I see the sign I think, who the hell are [I]you[/I] to [I]welcome[/I] [B]ME[/B]?
Isn't that terrible? I'll carry on with the reading now.[/QUOTE]
Well, he was living in Hiroshima for years... he probably forgot.
I was here. Then I wasn't. Then I was again.
[QUOTE=Parkaboy]The Existentialism I haven't read since college. Then I loaned it to a friend. Said friend gave my original Fight Club hardback away as a birthday present so I didn't get this one back either. As I recall it's a good precis on aall the philosophers contained therein.
I have read the Viking portable Nietzsche and took a class on Nietzsche where we read pretty much everything else. thus Spake Zarathustra is a good intro and an easy read, it's in the Kaufmann portable. I liked The Birth of Tragedy. Human, All Too Human and Beyond Good and Evil. I seem to recall liking some of The Will to Power but it's been awhile. Beyond Good and Evil and Human, All Too Human are made up of aphorisms. Most of his basic philosophy is outlined in Zarathustra I'd start there and then decide which to look into next if you like his ideas.[/QUOTE]
Thanks for the info. I guess it's time to go update that amazon wish list. 
Awright, I have a question: Is the Sloosha island and the Ewing island the same place? The thing that really makes me think this is that there is reference in both parts to the fact that the natives think killing to be such a terrible thing. I wish I had a page number or something, but I left my shiny information-holding egg at a buddy's house...
ha ha 
ok, i think the "sloosha" island is hawaii and ewing tours islands in the fiji/new zealand/vanauatu area...but he's eventually brought to hawaii to recover and rehabilitate from the attempt on his life.
[QUOTE=moe.ron]ha ha
ok, i think the "sloosha" island is hawaii and ewing tours islands in the fiji/new zealand/vanauatu area...but he's eventually brought to hawaii to recover and rehabilitate from the attempt on his life.[/QUOTE]
Right, but in the Sloosha scene there are these somewhat primative natives and these sort of magical and technologically advanced off-islanders. Isn't it possible that everything in the book happened, chronologically, before the Ewing scenes? In other words there was the "future" which sort of collapsed and then we get to Sloosha where Ewing eventually lands.
hmmm... check out [URL=http://books.guardian.co.uk/reviews/generalfiction/0,6121,1162871,00.html]this review[/URL] that fleshes out the idea of "virtual past/future." i think maybe this is what you're getting at.
also published by the guardian unlimited books is [URL=http://books.guardian.co.uk/departments/generalfiction/story/0,6000,1151644,00.html]an interview with david mitchell[/URL]
Actually I checked it out last weekend, but I've just started it. I plan on reading it more this weekend, but I can tell you right now there's no way I'll have it finished.